EUROPEAN PATENT ORGANISATION
The European Patent Organisation’s executive body is under new management. Benoît Battistelli became the patent office’s president in July after a protracted election process. WIPR spoke to him about his initial tasks and future plans.
Europe encompasses approximately 10 million square kilometres. Cultural diversity is a certainty. Te continent requires treaties and agreements to bridge the borders protecting national interests for the benefit of a wider aim.
Te European Patent Convention, which was signed in 1973, provides for patent protection in the 37 European countries that are signatory to it. Te European Patent Organisation was established four years later with a brief to establish a system of law common to these states for the granting of patents for inventions. Te European Patent Office (EPO), as the executive arm of the organisation, must implement the provisions of the convention to overcome the competing national interests of the member states that make up the Administrative Council, the EPO’s governing body.
Since July, it has been Benoît Battistelli’s task as the new president of the EPO to lead the office. His IP credentials are proven. He was the chairman of the Administrative Council and the director general of the French National Institute of Industrial Property before he took up the new role.
Battistelli says: “I also have lots of experience in diplomatic fields. I have worked and lived in four different member states of the organisation: Poland, Italy, Turkey and France.”
www.worldipreview.com
Te Administrative Council is made of up delegations from each of the member states of the organisation. Each delegation has one vote to represent the interests of the member state in council decisions on EPO actions. One such action was the March presidential elections. Battistelli eventually won aſter three deferrals.
He says: “Te president is elected by a three-quarter majority and it is very difficult to reach a three- quarter majority in any national or international organisation. It was in due time, considering it was made four months before the end of my predecessor’s mandate. In terms of governance, I think things have been done correctly.”
“I don’t think it took too much time, because each country has one vote in a secret ballot that needs to produce a three-quarter majority. It’s very difficult to apply this rule. It does give the new president a feeling of support because of the very large majority. Twenty-seven countries out of 36 member states [Albania joined aſter the election] voted for me. Tis is a very large, supporting majority, which is very important.”
Serbia will become the 38th country to accede to the European Patent Convention and join the organisation in October. Finding its voice in an organisation already boasting nations with strong intellectual property focuses might
prove difficult. “Some member states are more influential than others because they are more active in IP,” says Battistelli. “It also depends on the head of each delegation.”
Te EPO enforces a democratic solution in such situations. Positive alliances within the council can also be forged that help particular groups to achieve shared aims.
Battistelli says: “We take a lot of care to be sure that each delegation is heard and listened to, and that each one can be comfortable in this organisation. Also, geographical and cultural concepts are sometimes shared. Delegations join forces so that they can express their voices more efficiently—like the Scandinavian group for instance. Tis is a reflection of European reality, so I think it’s quite positive.”
Maintaining and improving co-operation between national patent offices and the EPO is necessary to ensure a better service for users of the patent system. Te European Patent Network was established in 2007 to encourage the EPO and member offices to share knowledge and skills. “I think it is important to develop this network,” he says. “Europe needs two tiers of patent activity.”
He adds: “Putting more substance in the network to help relations with national offices
World Intellectual Property Review September/October 2010 17
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112